By Nowell Berg

City of Kimberley council June 12 voted five to two to deny a business license to 1114092 B.C. Ltd. that would allow for a third medical marijuana dispensary in the city.

Mayor Don McCormick along with Councillors Kent Goodwin, Albert Hoglund, Bev Middlebrook and Sandra Roberts refused to accept Wes Rogers’, the company’s lawyer, second request to have Kim Cox’s sole proprietor business license transferred to the corporation. The original businesses license issued to Ms. Cox was specific to 185 Deer Park Avenue, which could potentially be used to open a dispensary.

Councillors Roberts and Goodwin cited “extensive conversations with Kimberley RCMP Sgt. (Chris) Newel” for voting against the dispensary. Goodwin even said, “We are on the radar of [the RCMP] higher ups.”

He suggested that the city could “lose what we have” if the city issued more dispensary business licenses. Roberts urged council to be “cautious” as Newel was “in a tenuous situation” regarding the law and illegal marijuana dispensaries.

Mayor McCormick reiterated his position, made at the May 23 council meeting, that the “landscape [had] changed” since the original business license was issued to Cox. He cited the “very fuzzy and vague” draft legislation tabled by the Federal government as a reason for the city and council to wait on issuing any additional business licenses for marijuana dispensaries. He noted the two existing dispensaries were “providing adequate coverage” for area residents.

Councillors Nigel Kitto and Darryl Oakley voted for allowing the business license transfer.

In a related matter, council voted to accept a staff report on ‘Handling Cannabis Dispensary Business Licenses’ and its recommendation to “cease issuing” such licenses. Read the report here, on page 99.

Coun. Oakley was the only one to vote against the motion to “cease issuing” such licenses.

Wes Rogers, Cox’s lawyer, provided this statement. “Our client is disappointed that council changed course after significant time, energy, and money has been invested in this business based on the previous approval given by council in November, 2016. Releaf simply wanted to fill a need in the market for quality medical marijuana. When it incorporated and, at council’s suggestion, changed location, council then denied our client that opportunity, despite that the same opportunity has been granted to the other two dispensaries. Our client thinks that the city should treat all citizens equally and fairly, and not prefer some business over others. Releaf is currently considering whether it will appeal council’s decision to the courts.”

e-KNOW

 

---

Article Share

---